A warning was hit when running xfstests/generic/068 in a Hyper-V guest:
[...] ------------[ cut here ]------------
[...] DEBUG_LOCKS_WARN_ON(lockdep_hardirqs_enabled())
[...] WARNING: CPU: 2 PID: 1350 at kernel/locking/lockdep.c:5280 check_flags.part.0+0x165/0x170
[...] ...
[...] Workqueue: events pwq_unbound_release_workfn
[...] RIP: 0010:check_flags.part.0+0x165/0x170
[...] ...
[...] Call Trace:
[...] lock_is_held_type+0x72/0x150
[...] ? lock_acquire+0x16e/0x4a0
[...] rcu_read_lock_sched_held+0x3f/0x80
[...] __send_ipi_one+0x14d/0x1b0
[...] hv_send_ipi+0x12/0x30
[...] __pv_queued_spin_unlock_slowpath+0xd1/0x110
[...] __raw_callee_save___pv_queued_spin_unlock_slowpath+0x11/0x20
[...] .slowpath+0x9/0xe
[...] lockdep_unregister_key+0x128/0x180
[...] pwq_unbound_release_workfn+0xbb/0xf0
[...] process_one_work+0x227/0x5c0
[...] worker_thread+0x55/0x3c0
[...] ? process_one_work+0x5c0/0x5c0
[...] kthread+0x153/0x170
[...] ? __kthread_bind_mask+0x60/0x60
[...] ret_from_fork+0x1f/0x30
The cause of the problem is we have call chain lockdep_unregister_key()
-> <irq disabled by raw_local_irq_save()> lockdep_unlock() ->
arch_spin_unlock() -> __pv_queued_spin_unlock_slowpath() -> pv_kick() ->
__send_ipi_one() -> trace_hyperv_send_ipi_one().
Although this particular warning is triggered because Hyper-V has a
trace point in ipi sending, but in general arch_spin_unlock() may call
another function having a trace point in it, so put the arch_spin_lock()
and arch_spin_unlock() after lock_recursion protection to fix this
problem and avoid similiar problems.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201113110512.1056501-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Chris Wilson reported a problem spotted by check_chain_key(): a chain
key got changed in validate_chain() because we modify the ->read in
validate_chain() to skip checks for dependency adding, and ->read is
taken into calculation for chain key since commit f611e8cf98
("lockdep: Take read/write status in consideration when generate
chainkey").
Fix this by avoiding to modify ->read in validate_chain() based on two
facts: a) since we now support recursive read lock detection, there is
no need to skip checks for dependency adding for recursive readers, b)
since we have a), there is only one case left (nest_lock) where we want
to skip checks in validate_chain(), we simply remove the modification
for ->read and rely on the return value of check_deadlock() to skip the
dependency adding.
Reported-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201102053743.450459-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Pull locking fixes from Thomas Gleixner:
"A couple of locking fixes:
- Fix incorrect failure injection handling in the fuxtex code
- Prevent a preemption warning in lockdep when tracking
local_irq_enable() and interrupts are already enabled
- Remove more raw_cpu_read() usage from lockdep which causes state
corruption on !X86 architectures.
- Make the nr_unused_locks accounting in lockdep correct again"
* tag 'locking-urgent-2020-11-01' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip:
lockdep: Fix nr_unused_locks accounting
locking/lockdep: Remove more raw_cpu_read() usage
futex: Fix incorrect should_fail_futex() handling
lockdep: Fix preemption WARN for spurious IRQ-enable
Chris reported that commit 24d5a3bffef1 ("lockdep: Fix
usage_traceoverflow") breaks the nr_unused_locks validation code
triggered by /proc/lockdep_stats.
By fully splitting LOCK_USED and LOCK_USED_READ it becomes a bad
indicator for accounting nr_unused_locks; simplyfy by using any first
bit.
Fixes: 24d5a3bffef1 ("lockdep: Fix usage_traceoverflow")
Reported-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Tested-by: Chris Wilson <chris@chris-wilson.co.uk>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201027124834.GL2628@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
I initially thought raw_cpu_read() was OK, since if it is !0 we have
IRQs disabled and can't get migrated, so if we get migrated both CPUs
must have 0 and it doesn't matter which 0 we read.
And while that is true; it isn't the whole store, on pretty much all
architectures (except x86) this can result in computing the address for
one CPU, getting migrated, the old CPU continuing execution with another
task (possibly setting recursion) and then the new CPU reading the value
of the old CPU, which is no longer 0.
Similer to:
baffd723e4 ("lockdep: Revert "lockdep: Use raw_cpu_*() for per-cpu variables"")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20201026152256.GB2651@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
It is valid (albeit uncommon) to call local_irq_enable() without first
having called local_irq_disable(). In this case we enter
lockdep_hardirqs_on*() with IRQs enabled and trip a preemption warning
for using __this_cpu_read().
Use this_cpu_read() instead to avoid the warning.
Fixes: 4d004099a6 ("lockdep: Fix lockdep recursion")
Reported-by: syzbot+53f8ce8bbc07924b6417@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Reported-by: kernel test robot <lkp@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Pull RCU changes from Ingo Molnar:
- Debugging for smp_call_function()
- RT raw/non-raw lock ordering fixes
- Strict grace periods for KASAN
- New smp_call_function() torture test
- Torture-test updates
- Documentation updates
- Miscellaneous fixes
[ This doesn't actually pull the tag - I've dropped the last merge from
the RCU branch due to questions about the series. - Linus ]
* tag 'core-rcu-2020-10-12' of git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tip/tip: (77 commits)
smp: Make symbol 'csd_bug_count' static
kernel/smp: Provide CSD lock timeout diagnostics
smp: Add source and destination CPUs to __call_single_data
rcu: Shrink each possible cpu krcp
rcu/segcblist: Prevent useless GP start if no CBs to accelerate
torture: Add gdb support
rcutorture: Allow pointer leaks to test diagnostic code
rcutorture: Hoist OOM registry up one level
refperf: Avoid null pointer dereference when buf fails to allocate
rcutorture: Properly synchronize with OOM notifier
rcutorture: Properly set rcu_fwds for OOM handling
torture: Add kvm.sh --help and update help message
rcutorture: Add CONFIG_PROVE_RCU_LIST to TREE05
torture: Update initrd documentation
rcutorture: Replace HTTP links with HTTPS ones
locktorture: Make function torture_percpu_rwsem_init() static
torture: document --allcpus argument added to the kvm.sh script
rcutorture: Output number of elapsed grace periods
rcutorture: Remove KCSAN stubs
rcu: Remove unused "cpu" parameter from rcu_report_qs_rdp()
...
Steve reported that lockdep_assert*irq*(), when nested inside lockdep
itself, will trigger a false-positive.
One example is the stack-trace code, as called from inside lockdep,
triggering tracing, which in turn calls RCU, which then uses
lockdep_assert_irqs_disabled().
Fixes: a21ee6055c ("lockdep: Change hardirq{s_enabled,_context} to per-cpu variables")
Reported-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Pull v5.10 RCU changes from Paul E. McKenney:
- Debugging for smp_call_function().
- Strict grace periods for KASAN. The point of this series is to find
RCU-usage bugs, so the corresponding new RCU_STRICT_GRACE_PERIOD
Kconfig option depends on both DEBUG_KERNEL and RCU_EXPERT, and is
further disabled by dfefault. Finally, the help text includes
a goodly list of scary caveats.
- New smp_call_function() torture test.
- Torture-test updates.
- Documentation updates.
- Miscellaneous fixes.
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Qian Cai reported a BFS_EQUEUEFULL warning [1] after read recursive
deadlock detection merged into tip tree recently. Unlike the previous
lockep graph searching, which iterate every lock class (every node in
the graph) exactly once, the graph searching for read recurisve deadlock
detection needs to iterate every lock dependency (every edge in the
graph) once, as a result, the maximum memory cost of the circular queue
changes from O(V), where V is the number of lock classes (nodes or
vertices) in the graph, to O(E), where E is the number of lock
dependencies (edges), because every lock class or dependency gets
enqueued once in the BFS. Therefore we hit the BFS_EQUEUEFULL case.
However, actually we don't need to enqueue all dependencies for the BFS,
because every time we enqueue a dependency, we almostly enqueue all
other dependencies in the same dependency list ("almostly" is because
we currently check before enqueue, so if a dependency doesn't pass the
check stage we won't enqueue it, however, we can always do in reverse
ordering), based on this, we can only enqueue the first dependency from
a dependency list and every time we want to fetch a new dependency to
work, we can either:
1) fetch the dependency next to the current dependency in the
dependency list
or
2) if the dependency in 1) doesn't exist, fetch the dependency from
the queue.
With this approach, the "max bfs queue depth" for a x86_64_defconfig +
lockdep and selftest config kernel can get descreased from:
max bfs queue depth: 201
to (after apply this patch)
max bfs queue depth: 61
While I'm at it, clean up the code logic a little (e.g. directly return
other than set a "ret" value and goto the "exit" label).
[1]: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/17343f6f7f2438fc376125384133c5ba70c2a681.camel@redhat.com/
Reported-by: Qian Cai <cai@redhat.com>
Reported-by: syzbot+62ebe501c1ce9a91f68c@syzkaller.appspotmail.com
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200917080210.108095-1-boqun.feng@gmail.com
The __this_cpu*() accessors are (in general) IRQ-unsafe which, given
that percpu-rwsem is a blocking primitive, should be just fine.
However, file_end_write() is used from IRQ context and will cause
load-store issues on architectures where the per-cpu accessors are not
natively irq-safe.
Fix it by using the IRQ-safe this_cpu_*() for operations on
read_count. This will generate more expensive code on a number of
platforms, which might cause a performance regression for some of the
other percpu-rwsem users.
If any such is reported, we can consider alternative solutions.
Fixes: 70fe2f4815 ("aio: fix freeze protection of aio writes")
Signed-off-by: Hou Tao <houtao1@huawei.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Acked-by: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200915140750.137881-1-houtao1@huawei.com
During the LPC RCU BoF Paul asked how come the "USED" <- "IN-NMI"
detector doesn't trip over rcu_read_lock()'s lockdep annotation.
Looking into this I found a very embarrasing typo in
verify_lock_unused():
- if (!(class->usage_mask & LOCK_USED))
+ if (!(class->usage_mask & LOCKF_USED))
fixing that will indeed cause rcu_read_lock() to insta-splat :/
The above typo means that instead of testing for: 0x100 (1 <<
LOCK_USED), we test for 8 (LOCK_USED), which corresponds to (1 <<
LOCK_ENABLED_HARDIRQ).
So instead of testing for _any_ used lock, it will only match any lock
used with interrupts enabled.
The rcu_read_lock() annotation uses .check=0, which means it will not
set any of the interrupt bits and will thus never match.
In order to properly fix the situation and allow rcu_read_lock() to
correctly work, split LOCK_USED into LOCK_USED and LOCK_USED_READ and by
having .read users set USED_READ and test USED, pure read-recursive
locks are permitted.
Fixes: f6f48e1804 ("lockdep: Teach lockdep about "USED" <- "IN-NMI" inversions")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Tested-by: Masami Hiramatsu <mhiramat@kernel.org>
Acked-by: Paul E. McKenney <paulmck@kernel.org>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20200902160323.GK1362448@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net
Currently, the chainkey of a lock chain is a hash sum of the class_idx
of all the held locks, the read/write status are not taken in to
consideration while generating the chainkey. This could result into a
problem, if we have:
P1()
{
read_lock(B);
lock(A);
}
P2()
{
lock(A);
read_lock(B);
}
P3()
{
lock(A);
write_lock(B);
}
, and P1(), P2(), P3() run one by one. And when running P2(), lockdep
detects such a lock chain A -> B is not a deadlock, then it's added in
the chain cache, and then when running P3(), even if it's a deadlock, we
could miss it because of the hit of chain cache. This could be confirmed
by self testcase "chain cached mixed R-L/L-W ".
To resolve this, we use concept "hlock_id" to generate the chainkey, the
hlock_id is a tuple (hlock->class_idx, hlock->read), which fits in a u16
type. With this, the chainkeys are different is the lock sequences have
the same locks but different read/write status.
Besides, since we use "hlock_id" to generate chainkeys, the chain_hlocks
array now store the "hlock_id"s rather than lock_class indexes.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-15-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Currently, in safe->unsafe detection, lockdep misses the fact that a
LOCK_ENABLED_IRQ_*_READ usage and a LOCK_USED_IN_IRQ_*_READ usage may
cause deadlock too, for example:
P1 P2
<irq disabled>
write_lock(l1); <irq enabled>
read_lock(l2);
write_lock(l2);
<in irq>
read_lock(l1);
Actually, all of the following cases may cause deadlocks:
LOCK_USED_IN_IRQ_* -> LOCK_ENABLED_IRQ_*
LOCK_USED_IN_IRQ_*_READ -> LOCK_ENABLED_IRQ_*
LOCK_USED_IN_IRQ_* -> LOCK_ENABLED_IRQ_*_READ
LOCK_USED_IN_IRQ_*_READ -> LOCK_ENABLED_IRQ_*_READ
To fix this, we need to 1) change the calculation of exclusive_mask() so
that READ bits are not dropped and 2) always call usage() in
mark_lock_irq() to check usage deadlocks, even when the new usage of the
lock is READ.
Besides, adjust usage_match() and usage_acculumate() to recursive read
lock changes.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-12-boqun.feng@gmail.com
check_redundant() will report redundancy if it finds a path could
replace the about-to-add dependency in the BFS search. With recursive
read lock changes, we certainly need to change the match function for
the check_redundant(), because the path needs to match not only the lock
class but also the dependency kinds. For example, if the about-to-add
dependency @prev -> @next is A -(SN)-> B, and we find a path A -(S*)->
.. -(*R)->B in the dependency graph with __bfs() (for simplicity, we can
also say we find an -(SR)-> path from A to B), we can not replace the
dependency with that path in the BFS search. Because the -(SN)->
dependency can make a strong path with a following -(S*)-> dependency,
however an -(SR)-> path cannot.
Further, we can replace an -(SN)-> dependency with a -(EN)-> path, that
means if we find a path which is stronger than or equal to the
about-to-add dependency, we can report the redundancy. By "stronger", it
means both the start and the end of the path are not weaker than the
start and the end of the dependency (E is "stronger" than S and N is
"stronger" than R), so that we can replace the dependency with that
path.
To make sure we find a path whose start point is not weaker than the
about-to-add dependency, we use a trick: the ->only_xr of the root
(start point) of __bfs() is initialized as @prev-> == 0, therefore if
@prev is E, __bfs() will pick only -(E*)-> for the first dependency,
otherwise, __bfs() can pick -(E*)-> or -(S*)-> for the first dependency.
To make sure we find a path whose end point is not weaker than the
about-to-add dependency, we replace the match function for __bfs()
check_redundant(), we check for the case that either @next is R
(anything is not weaker than it) or the end point of the path is N
(which is not weaker than anything).
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-11-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Currently, lockdep only has limit support for deadlock detection for
recursive read locks.
This patch support deadlock detection for recursive read locks. The
basic idea is:
We are about to add dependency B -> A in to the dependency graph, we use
check_noncircular() to find whether we have a strong dependency path
A -> .. -> B so that we have a strong dependency circle (a closed strong
dependency path):
A -> .. -> B -> A
, which doesn't have two adjacent dependencies as -(*R)-> L -(S*)->.
Since A -> .. -> B is already a strong dependency path, so if either
B -> A is -(E*)-> or A -> .. -> B is -(*N)->, the circle A -> .. -> B ->
A is strong, otherwise not. So we introduce a new match function
hlock_conflict() to replace the class_equal() for the deadlock check in
check_noncircular().
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-10-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Now we have four types of dependencies in the dependency graph, and not
all the pathes carry real dependencies (the dependencies that may cause
a deadlock), for example:
Given lock A and B, if we have:
CPU1 CPU2
============= ==============
write_lock(A); read_lock(B);
read_lock(B); write_lock(A);
(assuming read_lock(B) is a recursive reader)
then we have dependencies A -(ER)-> B, and B -(SN)-> A, and a
dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A.
In lockdep w/o recursive locks, a dependency path from A to A
means a deadlock. However, the above case is obviously not a
deadlock, because no one holds B exclusively, therefore no one
waits for the other to release B, so who get A first in CPU1 and
CPU2 will run non-blockingly.
As a result, dependency path A -(ER)-> B -(SN)-> A is not a
real/strong dependency that could cause a deadlock.
From the observation above, we know that for a dependency path to be
real/strong, no two adjacent dependencies can be as -(*R)-> -(S*)->.
Now our mission is to make __bfs() traverse only the strong dependency
paths, which is simple: we record whether we only have -(*R)-> for the
previous lock_list of the path in lock_list::only_xr, and when we pick a
dependency in the traverse, we 1) filter out -(S*)-> dependency if the
previous lock_list only has -(*R)-> dependency (i.e. ->only_xr is true)
and 2) set the next lock_list::only_xr to true if we only have -(*R)->
left after we filter out dependencies based on 1), otherwise, set it to
false.
With this extension for __bfs(), we now need to initialize the root of
__bfs() properly (with a correct ->only_xr), to do so, we introduce some
helper functions, which also cleans up a little bit for the __bfs() root
initialization code.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-8-boqun.feng@gmail.com
To add recursive read locks into the dependency graph, we need to store
the types of dependencies for the BFS later. There are four types of
dependencies:
* Exclusive -> Non-recursive dependencies: EN
e.g. write_lock(prev) held and try to acquire write_lock(next)
or non-recursive read_lock(next), which can be represented as
"prev -(EN)-> next"
* Shared -> Non-recursive dependencies: SN
e.g. read_lock(prev) held and try to acquire write_lock(next) or
non-recursive read_lock(next), which can be represented as
"prev -(SN)-> next"
* Exclusive -> Recursive dependencies: ER
e.g. write_lock(prev) held and try to acquire recursive
read_lock(next), which can be represented as "prev -(ER)-> next"
* Shared -> Recursive dependencies: SR
e.g. read_lock(prev) held and try to acquire recursive
read_lock(next), which can be represented as "prev -(SR)-> next"
So we use 4 bits for the presence of each type in lock_list::dep. Helper
functions and macros are also introduced to convert a pair of locks into
lock_list::dep bit and maintain the addition of different types of
dependencies.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-7-boqun.feng@gmail.com
lock_list::distance is always not greater than MAX_LOCK_DEPTH (which
is 48 right now), so a u16 will fit. This patch reduces the size of
lock_list::distance to save space, so that we can introduce other fields
to help detect recursive read lock deadlocks without increasing the size
of lock_list structure.
Suggested-by: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-6-boqun.feng@gmail.com
Currently, __bfs() will do a breadth-first search in the dependency
graph and visit each lock class in the graph exactly once, so for
example, in the following graph:
A ---------> B
| ^
| |
+----------> C
a __bfs() call starts at A, will visit B through dependency A -> B and
visit C through dependency A -> C and that's it, IOW, __bfs() will not
visit dependency C -> B.
This is OK for now, as we only have strong dependencies in the
dependency graph, so whenever there is a traverse path from A to B in
__bfs(), it means A has strong dependencies to B (IOW, B depends on A
strongly). So no need to visit all dependencies in the graph.
However, as we are going to add recursive-read lock into the dependency
graph, as a result, not all the paths mean strong dependencies, in the
same example above, dependency A -> B may be a weak dependency and
traverse A -> C -> B may be a strong dependency path. And with the old
way of __bfs() (i.e. visiting every lock class exactly once), we will
miss the strong dependency path, which will result into failing to find
a deadlock. To cure this for the future, we need to find a way for
__bfs() to visit each dependency, rather than each class, exactly once
in the search until we find a match.
The solution is simple:
We used to mark lock_class::lockdep_dependency_gen_id to indicate a
class has been visited in __bfs(), now we change the semantics a little
bit: we now mark lock_class::lockdep_dependency_gen_id to indicate _all
the dependencies_ in its lock_{after,before} have been visited in the
__bfs() (note we only take one direction in a __bfs() search). In this
way, every dependency is guaranteed to be visited until we find a match.
Note: the checks in mark_lock_accessed() and lock_accessed() are
removed, because after this modification, we may call these two
functions on @source_entry of __bfs(), which may not be the entry in
"list_entries"
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-5-boqun.feng@gmail.com
__bfs() could return four magic numbers:
1: search succeeds, but none match.
0: search succeeds, find one match.
-1: search fails because of the cq is full.
-2: search fails because a invalid node is found.
This patch cleans things up by using a enum type for the return value
of __bfs() and its friends, this improves the code readability of the
code, and further, could help if we want to extend the BFS.
Signed-off-by: Boqun Feng <boqun.feng@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20200807074238.1632519-4-boqun.feng@gmail.com
